The Great Biden Distraction

[Markk]

Okay this is the summary of the bill by your non partisan, who ever they are group....

Here is a cut and paste of the summary from the actual bill presented by Sanchez.

(see original post above)

The summary in your link starts out that there is a crisis to secure the border, however the actual bill summary does not even mention securing the border.

In your opinion which will help both of us understand where we are coming from, what according to the summary you pasted was the crisis at the border?

Mind noting where the phrase "crisis at the border" is used? Just curious. Are you referring to the quote from Mitch McConnell or something else?

The bill was an attempt to use the legitimate legislative process to address glaring issues with the immigration system including an increase in asylum seekers arriving at the border. And doing it in a way that was aligned with our values and basic human rights.

Is it better that we militarized the border to reduce border crossings, in a way that circumvents the law and erodes the balance of the branches of government including both the legislative and judicial branches in favor of removing checks on the executive branch?

No, I got sloppy with my comment. Biden in 21 stated it was a crisis, and the White House flipped out and tried to walk it back.

I think you can see the difference between the summary of the so called non-partisan fact sheet and the actual bill, which we are discussing.

So back to the point that is the fact sheet is not really factual in its summary here and is in fact misleading. I haven't read the whole thing yet, but I haven't seen yet where it speaks to Biden let in millions of undocumented illegal aliens, and so much so that as they were being flown in and shipped in to other states, other than the border states....it did cause a crisis and epidemic.

Are you denying there was not a crisis at the border?

I was scrolling down the list and this one pooped out....

President Biden worked day and night to secure a deal that would free the hostages being held by Hamas terrorists, including Americans, result in an immediate ceasefire, create the conditions for an increased amount of humanitarian aid to get in to Gaza, and end the current conflict.

Come on Honor, the President had dementia....his aids are saying he worked maybe 6 hours a day. Point being this is not a fact sheet, it is a campaign out line?

I'm curious, is there a similar non partisan fact sheet for Trump's 1st 4 years? I looked and could not find one.

[honorentheos]

Mind noting where the phrase "crisis at the border" is used? Just curious. Are you referring to the quote from Mitch McConnell or something else?

The bill was an attempt to use the legitimate legislative process to address glaring issues with the immigration system including an increase in asylum seekers arriving at the border. And doing it in a way that was aligned with our values and basic human rights.

Is it better that we militarized the border to reduce border crossings, in a way that circumvents the law and erodes the balance of the branches of government including both the legislative and judicial branches in favor of removing checks on the executive branch?

No, I got sloppy with my comment. Biden in 21 stated it was a crisis, and the White House flipped out and tried to walk it back.

I think you can see the difference between the summary of the so called non-partisan fact sheet and the actual bill, which we are discussing.

Care to be specific rather than allude to differences? Are you ok with circumventing the Constitution and the law in order to militarize the border and damage the balance between the branches of government?

So back to the point that is the fact sheet is not really factual in its summary here and is in fact misleading. I haven't read the whole thing yet, but I haven't seen yet where it speaks to Biden let in millions of undocumented illegal aliens, and so much so that as they were being flown in and shipped in to other states, other than the border states....it did cause a crisis and epidemic.

Is this your admission that the information in the fact sheet is sound and you wish to expand on it to try and find cause for not having to believe the Biden administration did, in fact, accomplish quite a bit that helped Americans? That your complaints are based on conservative talking points you feel are missing? Would you like to offer evidence rather than vibes?

Are you denying there was not a crisis at the border?

I think the salient question here is why you think there was but don't seem to want to hold Republican lawmakers accountable for using it as a political football if it was in fact a crisis?

I was scrolling down the list and this one pooped out....

"President Biden worked day and night to secure a deal that would free the hostages being held by Hamas terrorists, including Americans, result in an immediate ceasefire, create the conditions for an increased amount of humanitarian aid to get in to Gaza, and end the current conflict."

Come on Honor, the President had dementia....his aids are saying he worked maybe 6 hours a day. Point being this is not a fact sheet, it is a campaign out line?

I'm curious, is there a similar non partisan fact sheet for Trump's 1st 4 years? I looked and could not find one.

Oh, you want to jump topics and go with vibes again. I see.

Just to be clear, Markk, it's perfectly human to want to find the out where you can decide you don't have to believe the Biden administration was actually a successful administration having a positive impact on the lives of Americans. I've been pointing out this was the route you were taking from the jump. It doesn't even matter to me if you fail to acknowledge that. But your last post was exactly that and in spades.

[Kishkumen]

Lol, you admitted Biden had dementia.... then you get butt hurt when I agree with you. Kish, I doubt this is not even close to being over and more is going to surface.

Then after you said he had dementia, and I agreed, you asked me how I could know that, and now you are saying he did not have full blown Alzheimer's, as if you know.

The people that were close to him, more and more are saying he was not there or in charge. The right wing media more and more look like prophets as the left concedes more and more what it was like in the Biden White House.

Sigh. Exactly as predicted, the broken clock is wrong most of the day. Yawn.

For those who are not following your every dim and misbegotten thought process, I said that Reagan had early Alzheimer's by the end of his second term, and Biden had early or incipient dementia somewhere in his one term. I did not say "[Biden] did not have full blown Alzheimer's."

My reaction to you is the usual tired frustration of having to deal with a person who can't manage to read a single post correctly. It is tiresome. Also, having dodos agree with you inaccurately is not exactly gratifying. What does gratify me is when someone like Gadianton agrees or disagrees with me because I can be sure that 1) he read what I said; 2) he absorbed it accurately; 3) he has something worthwhile to add; 4) if he disagrees, he will undoubtedly enlighten me, and I will be grateful for it.

That is what a rewarding exchange is like. Interactions with you are dull and frustrating. I could go to any playground in America and get the kind of emotional and intellectual depth I get from you. You are the Nelson Muntz of DM.

[Markk]

Sigh. Exactly as predicted, the broken clock is wrong most of the day. Yawn.

For those who are not following your every dim and misbegotten thought process. I said that Reagan had early Alzheimer's by the end of his second term, and Biden had early or incipient dementia somewhere in his second term. I did not say "[Biden] did not have full blown Alzheimer's."

You said that Biden had dementia, and when I said he did, you said how do I know it? Then you said he did not have Alzheimer's, as if you actually know that? Focus, that was my point, that you seem to be able to know his mental acuity, while I don't.

What is clear, from even the 2019 primary debates, he is in a clear cognitive decline. Laura Trump certainly noticed it and Jake Tapper called her and apologized basically saying she saw something he did not see. I certainly saw it and it was discussed here, you even said as I recall it should be on the table to discuss it; are you denying that? It was and is no secret since at least 2019 his decline was apparent. Axelrod was calling him Mr. Magoo. My assumption that he was mentally declining as far back as 2019 is well supported and documented.

I get all you have is an ad-hom approach to being called out on things folks disagree with you about....all one has to do is read your posts. We will see how this all pans out Kish, I don't see it going away anytime soon.

I doubt you can listen to any critical thought about his decline, but listen to this....by his supporters.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Florida-0PEW ... lM&index=2

And this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Florida-0PEW ... lM&index=2

Are these folks who unlike us, very close to the situation wrong here?

[Gunnar]

I doubt you can listen to any critical thought about his decline, but listen to this....by his supporters.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Florida-0PEW ... lM&index=2

And this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Florida-0PEW ... lM&index=2

Are these folks who unlike us, very close to the situation wrong here?

Neither of those videos are available anymore. I wonder why.

[honorentheos]

Presumably copyrighted material.

I do feel there is an issue with how Biden's condition was more or less obscured. I listened to an interview with Jake Tapper and it seems the general consensus among Democratic leadership and even folks in the White House was there was a serious lack of transparency. I mean, I kind of understand why given his job, and I do think the presidency has been about an administration more than a person for decades at least. But trust is such a critical thing in politics as in any societal organization or relationship and this is pretty serious. I don't know. The right are using it to ignore their own issues and the absolute decimation of democracy being enacted. Nothing about the situation is great.

[Kishkumen]

You said that Biden had dementia, and when I said he did, you said how do I know it? Then you said he did not have Alzheimer's, as if you actually know that? Focus, that was my point, that you seem to be able to know his mental acuity, while I don't.

God, you're weird. I stated my opinion that he had "incipient dementia." You crowed about how I said he "had dementia." Now you are saying that you can't tell what his mental acuity is, and that his was somehow your point.

Just give it up, Markk. You have nothing to argue about. It is absolutely pointless. I stated MY OPINION. You tried to make something out of it that it wasn't, and I never claimed it to be. Now you are trying to pull some bizarre maneuver to preserve some dignity.

What is clear, from even the 2019 primary debates, he is in a clear cognitive decline. Laura Trump certainly noticed it and Jake Tapper called her and apologized basically saying she saw something he did not see. I certainly saw it and it was discussed here, you even said as I recall it should be on the table to discuss it; are you denying that? It was and is no secret since at least 2019 his decline was apparent. Axelrod was calling him Mr. Magoo. My assumption that he was mentally declining as far back as 2019 is well supported and documented.

Oh, so now you know his mental acuity based on the opinion of Laura Trump, of all people. Make up your mind, dude. I don't think Laura Trump knows crap, or that she was right about crap. As I have noted, telling what is up with Biden is complicated because of his speech impediment, which you simply ignore. There are lots of issues that pop up as people age. Some of them do get mistaken for cognitive decline when they are not. People with hearing loss get mistaken for people with cognitive problems. People with speech issues, too. I think there is some cognitive decline in Biden at this point. There probably was in the last year of his presidency. Still, he does OK in interviews.

Trump has been an incurious, immoral moron his whole life. Nothing anyone can fix about that.

I get all you have is an ad-hom approach to being called out on things folks disagree with you about....all one has to do is read your posts.

Um, no, I have an ad-hom approach to assholes. Disagreement is not anything I have a problem with. I disagree amicably with people all the time. You, sir, are an asshole. Behave like an asshole, and you get what you ask for--poor treatment from others.

[Gadianton]

Presumably copyrighted material.

I do feel there is an issue with how Biden's condition was more or less obscured. I listened to an interview with Jake Tapper and it seems the general consensus among Democratic leadership and even folks in the White House was there was a serious lack of transparency. I mean, I kind of understand why given his job, and I do think the presidency has been about an administration more than a person for decades at least. But trust is such a critical thing in politics as in any societal organization or relationship and this is pretty serious. I don't know. The right are using it to ignore their own issues and the absolute decimation of democracy being enacted. Nothing about the situation is great.

I think you're trying too hard to be fair. Nobody "lost trust" over it. There are pros and cons to transparency if he was struggling. That doesn't mean the Democratic Party doesn't have a serious issue securing a candidate in the first place. Most of us were like, the administration, as you say, was doing a reasonable job, and if statistically the incumbent candidate wins, then if they can glue a smile to his face long enough to win, then we prevent the worst case scenario of a walking and babbling "auto pen" getting in to sign off on the Heritage Foundation's dictatorship fantasies that were emphatically denied in the months prior. If a typical executive order is 10 pages, 10 x 152 = 1,520 pages of reading alone, which is longer than the length of the entire Bible, just of his own orders. To believe that Trump is "running the ship," that he's even read, let alone authored more pages of material than the Bible from beginning to end in just a few months is laughable. That's faster than Joseph Smith dictated the Book of Mormon, and its on top of endless rounds of golf and whatever else.

Do the conservatives complaining about the administration lying about Biden's health care that Trump lied over and over again about his connections to Project 2025? No. In some cases, they came right out and said openly that he has to lie about it, even the Heritage Foundation endorsed his "understandable" lying about it because they know it's not in the interest of the voters they need reach.

Who are those hurt by the alleged breach of trust? It's obviously not those making a big deal about it because they're all republicans who have a vested interest in the Democratic party being untrustworthy. So give me examples of the folks who truly believed in Biden and the Democratic Party but felt betrayed after learning that he wasn't operating at capacity and it was covered up? Who are those who might have vote Democrat in the future but now are uncertain because of it? Nobody.

The issue is, how did we find ourselves in the situation to begin with? It matters as a strategic failure, of everyone playing by the numbers rather than admitting earlier on that his public weakness, especially, could be a real problem, and to look earlier on into other options.

[honorentheos]

Maybe it is trying to be fair, though I personally don't appreciate it as a voter. It's challenging to also defend when many of the younger people I talked with leading up to the election had concerns with Biden's age, then with the feeling Harris replaced him, when they say they wish they could vote for someone they actually want and not to keep the worse alternative out of office. And I get that. At some level, it stops seeming pragmatic political behavior.

So it isn't about fairness to me so much as it is genuine concern that we are losing our way completely. Trump and MAGA are absolutely the nightmare end to democratic rule of law they laugh off as TDS or some other overreaction while the evidence is unmistakable. But there isn't an excuse for what Tapper describes and what happened. I honestly expect better, and don't want what we are willing to tolerate in the name of challenging authoritarian rule to erase our values. For better or worse, I expect better.

[Markk]

" Kish...God, you're weird. I stated my opinion that he had "incipient dementia." You crowed about how I said he "had dementia." Now you are saying that you can't tell what his mental acuity is, and that his was somehow your point."

Lol. yes you said that, that he is developing or in the first stages of dementia, incipient dementia is still dementia. . How do you know that? You said I couldn't now , yet you can?

This is just another time you said something stupid and are to proud to admit you were sloppy.

And now you are doubling down by inserting it now your "opinion." Lol, this is what you wrote, very confidently....

"But Biden had incipient dementia when he was president. And . . . .

Nothing. He had incipient dementia."

And

"So what is important about our current situation? That Biden had incipient dementia when he was president but was surrounded by competent, law-abiding, and experienced underlings? ..."

Kish, this is just like your snafu with Sandra Tanner, you said something ignorant, wrong or hypocritical, and then just continue to double down on trying to defend it.

As time goes on my guess is that it will become very clear of what he had/has and how long he has had it. Now that Tapper is getting rich and cashing in, other will follow.

Just give it up, Markk. You have nothing to argue about. It is absolutely pointless. I stated MY OPINION. You tried to make something out of it that it wasn't, and I never claimed it to be. Now you are trying to pull some bizarre maneuver to preserve some dignity.

I did a word search on your opening rant, the word opinion is not written in it. In fact you even compared it to Reagans Alzheimer's. " You know, like Ronald Reagan had incipient Alzheimer's when he was president."

Oh, so now you know his mental acuity based on the opinion of Laura Trump, of all people. Make up your mind, dude. I don't think Laura Trump knows crap, or that she was right about crap. As I have noted, telling what is up with Biden is complicated because of his speech impediment, which you simply ignore. There are lots of issues that pop up as people age. Some of them do get mistaken for cognitive decline when they are not. People with hearing loss get mistaken for people with cognitive problems. People with speech issues, too. I think there is some cognitive decline in Biden at this point. There probably was in the last year of his presidency. Still, he does OK in interviews.

Trump has been an incurious, immoral moron his whole life. Nothing anyone can fix about that.

LOl, your falling apart here Kish, where did I say that I based it on what Laura Trump said? I don't he know if I saw the Trump/Tapper interview until I saw it on a pod cast.

What I said is "What is clear, from even the 2019 primary debates, he is in a clear cognitive decline. Laura Trump certainly noticed it and Jake Tapper called her and apologized basically saying she saw something he did not see. I certainly saw it and it was discussed here, you even said as I recall it should be on the table to discuss it; are you denying that? It was and is no secret since at least 2019 his decline was apparent. Axelrod was calling him Mr. Magoo. My assumption that he was mentally declining as far back as 2019 is well supported and documented."

Remember when you were saying here it was okay to discuss his mental acuity? I seem to remember that thinking you were showing a bit of objectivity.

But any way are you now going to double down on this a say that I base what I saw on Laura Trump, or admit you just got a little sloppy in your accusation?

Kish
Um, no, I have an ad-hom approach to assholes. Disagreement is not anything I have a problem with. I disagree amicably with people all the time. You, sir, are an asshole. Behave like an asshole, and you get what you ask for--poor treatment from others.

That is nice, may I use that as my signature?

Love ya